| Shackadeemus Ireland. February 03 2012 05:27. Posts 245 | Profile # |
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/0/02/Megaton.jpg/400px-Megaton.jpg)
I'm not sure if everyone who plays 4v4 would agree with me on this but it was the best 4v4 map, by far! Out of all of the 4v4 maps, I had the most fun on this one. I love the fact that you are really close to all of your allies, which means you are a lot less likely to get 6 pool'd and die in the first 5 minutes of the game, as your allies can help you out a lot easier. On other maps it would not be possible.
I also love the expansions in this map, it has 4 natural expansions nearby so everyone can freely expand relatively early. Then there are the 4 gold bases, which are well sought after and each team must battle back and forth to keep control of them. Overall I think it is an excellent 4v4 team map.
So my question is: why-o-why did blizzard decide to remove this map and replace it with such maps as district 10 (which feel is a terrible map)? It's not because it was veto'd by players, because from my experience I played it almost every second map. I had some great games on this map, I really miss it and I wish blizzard would bring it back into the 4v4 map pool. Anyone else feel the same? |
| |
|
| ArcticRaven France. February 03 2012 05:48. Posts 1179 | Profile # |
| I do. This was one of the best as far as 4/4 map go. |
| | [EatThePath] I call assassins as my faction. Please tell me we can all agree that in the version of history, Steppes of War will be Jerusalem. |
|
|
| Souljah United States. February 03 2012 05:49. Posts 416 | Profile Blog # |
| Agreed.. it was by far the best 4v4 map. Plenty of expansions, and plenty of room for huge battles. Xelnaga's were well placed too. If you ask me, they should replace extinction with this map. Extinction has way too many narrow pathways for 4v4. |
|
|
| RoyGBiv_13 United States. February 03 2012 05:49. Posts 597 | Profile Blog # |
| I don't 4v4 very often, but I rmeember a few absusive strategies warping in units in their base with an easily defended pylon on low ground. Though, this seems to be the norm on team maps, so.... |
| | Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic |
|
|
| skatbone United States. February 03 2012 06:21. Posts 926 | Profile # |
Well, I agree that District 10 is terrible. But I also couldn't stand Megaton. Two WIIIIIIDE ramps leading into the main!? I hated playing random 4v4s on this as T or P because you were damned if you walled and damned if didn't wall. Even people on my team would get pissy if we lost a game due to not walling.
I really liked the Typhon map...not Typhon Peaks but that other one with the two golds in the middle. In general, though, I think most Blizz 4v4 maps are lacking to the extent that they don't give every player a natural. |
|
|
| ragnorr Denmark. February 03 2012 06:33. Posts 3953 | Profile # |
On February 03 2012 06:21 skatbone wrote:
Well, I agree that District 10 is terrible. But I also couldn't stand Megaton. Two WIIIIIIDE ramps leading into the main!? I hated playing random 4v4s on this as T or P because you were damned if you walled and damned if didn't wall. Even people on my team would get pissy if we lost a game due to not walling.
I really liked the Typhon map...not Typhon Peaks but that other one with the two golds in the middle. In general, though, I think most Blizz 4v4 maps are lacking to the extent that they don't give every player a natural.
Problem with most 4v4 maps is also the fact that they either have a very little rush distance or have a huge ramp per players to wall off. Some times even both. Some maps also have a far to long distance betwen your allies making it very anoying to reach them in time for an attack |
| |
|
| The_Templar United States. February 03 2012 08:48. Posts 4228 | Profile Blog # |
How the heck is district 10 terrible when we have maps like this, which are incredibly rush friendly in so many ways?
Cheese is incredible on this map and the game promises to be very low Eco due to the main mineral lines being against the outer edges of the main, meaning really easy reaper/colossus/tank harass.
I could also 4 gate with a zerg ally and have him float an overlord while I warp zealots in an unfortunate mineral line.
I would like to see a 4v4 map combining the amazing aspects of District 10, including one inbase nat, ONE main enterence for the opponent, and a good layout, with the interesting gameplay of megaton, which is always varied despite being cheese 75% of the time. |
| | I am the 4% http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=17208214 ||| Currently attempting to get on another funday monday~ ||| http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=367420 <-- My map portfolio! |
|
|
| Hizzay Canada. February 03 2012 09:06. Posts 31 | Profile # |
| A better question is why Lava Flow is still in the map pool. The middle spawn locations are terrible, you're pretty much guaranteed to be killed by a cannon rush. The only good thing about that map is that there's lots of expansions, which is seriously lacking in all of the team ladder maps. |
|
|
| AyameStarcraft United Kingdom. February 03 2012 12:01. Posts 192 | Profile Blog # |
For me this is a worse version of Fossil Quarry (which is absolutely terrible).
Plenty of expansions you say? No I don't think so I don't like being restricted to two base economy thanks. This is my main gripe with 4v4 in general and Outpost is bad for one out of the 4 players specifically. Megaton was the map that I had the largest amount of sub 6 minute games on due to the massive amount of early aggression (at least when I played on that map).
Goodbye and good riddance. But to be fair most of the 4v4 maps are bad. Deadlock is ok but I think the exact same maps would be better if you at least look at Deadlock Ridge and notice that natural expansions and side expansions allow 3 base economy for a good amount of players in the game.
EDIT: Agree with the above poster. Why on earth is Lava Flow still there? I think Lava Flow should be a 3v3 map.
Last edit: 2012-02-03 12:01:50 |
| |
|
| Flamingo777 United States. February 03 2012 12:12. Posts 1140 | Profile # |
| I'm not a person who likes 4v4s, nor plays them a lot. However, when I did try out some monobattles on this map, it was quite fun! |
|
|
| Zariel Australia. February 03 2012 12:16. Posts 969 | Profile Blog # |
Lol, lava flow. It was impossible to counter a cannon rush supported by an OL.
Megaton was a good map, but 3rd base had so much competition given an easy natural. I had a pretty solid protoss mindset where I'd go colossus into mass archons because minerals were so scarce. You actually had to be economical about spending your money and trading armies efficiently.
I dont get why everyone hates district 10, it's THE BEST macro map where you could easily have 3 bases each and each player has a definitive role in their 'zone'. |
| |
|
 WniO United States. February 03 2012 14:52. Posts 2704 | Profile Blog # |
| worst 4v4 map thats why. expos were atrocious. |
|
|
| IMPrime United States. February 03 2012 15:37. Posts 459 | Profile # |
megaton was alright, but that was because I had so much fun going mass hellions on that map.
Compared to maps like lava flow (lol) or extinction, though, it's way better. Of the 4v4 maps I've played on, I would rate them like this from best to worst...
Deadlock Ridge
*a big gap*
District 10
Fossil Quarry
Megaton
*another big gap*
Sand Canyon
Toxic Slums
*another big gap*
Extinction
Lava Flow Last edit: 2012-02-03 15:38:37 |
|
|
| Azzur Australia. February 03 2012 16:10. Posts 5852 | Profile Blog # |
4v4 is not meant to be balanced and all team maps should expect abuse of some sort.
If people found this map fun, then it should've remained in the pool. |
|
|
| Kid-Fox Canada. February 03 2012 17:08. Posts 392 | Profile Blog # |
| Why is it a necessity for a good 4v4 map to have 3 bases for everyone? The idea of 8 maxed deathball armies lumbering around having massive battles is both appealing in awesomeness but also probably not feasible for everyone's computer. Not every player has a beastly rig that handles the game on Ultra/Extreme graphics. |
|
|
| nucLeaRTV Romania. February 03 2012 17:09. Posts 720 | Profile # |
| Also the removal of tempest of 2v2 pool was a bad decision. The only 2v2 macro map out there... |
| | "Having your own haters means you are famous" |
|
|
| ragnorr Denmark. February 03 2012 17:31. Posts 3953 | Profile # |
On February 03 2012 17:08 Kid-Fox wrote:
Why is it a necessity for a good 4v4 map to have 3 bases for everyone? The idea of 8 maxed deathball armies lumbering around having massive battles is both appealing in awesomeness but also probably not feasible for everyone's computer. Not every player has a beastly rig that handles the game on Ultra/Extreme graphics.
Why is it good to force cannonrush/tier 1 rushes only? Just getting into mid game would be fine but half of the maps expos are so bad its not viable alot of the time |
| |
|
| JonnyLaw United States. February 03 2012 17:34. Posts 1682 | Profile Blog # |
| Getting to the late game on any map in 4v4 would require neither side committing to early aggression. This doesn't happen often in my 4v4 experience. |
|
|
| Sumahi Guam. February 03 2012 17:59. Posts 5035 | Profile Blog # |
| I love this map. So many ridiculous and crazy games took place on this map. |
| | Startale <3, ST_July <3, HongUn <3, Savior <3, Gretorp <3, Nada <3, Rainbow <3, Ret <3, Squirtle <3, Bomber <3 |
|
|
| []Phase[] Belgium. February 03 2012 20:27. Posts 626 | Profile # |
| from the 4v4 that I did play, yes I liked that map the most |
|
|
| 1 2 Next All |
|
|
|
Store
WCS
